Artificer's Bonus Feats

[Slaved]

At Levels 4, 8, 12, 16, and 20 the Artificer gains a Bonus Feat from a Restricted List. Does the Artificer need to meet the Prerequisites for these Bonus Feats?

 

[avr]

There's no wording under the Artificer's bonus feats excluding them from prerequisites (unlike the Ranger combat styles, say) so I believe they require the usual prerequisites.

 

[Hypersmurf]

There's no wording under the Artificer's bonus feats excluding them from prerequisites (unlike the Ranger combat styles, say) so I believe they require the usual prerequisites.

Consider that the Fighter and Wizard bonus feats, on the other hand, specifically require you to meet prerequisites, while the Artificer text doesn't mention them... and we have this line from the Monster Manual:
Sometimes a creature has one or more bonus feats, marked with a superscript B (B). Creatures often do not have the prerequisites for a bonus feat. If this is so, the creature can still use the feat.

Now, if this applies to all bonus feats (except where specified otherwise), then the Fighter and the Wizard only need to meet prerequisites because their Bonus Feat Class Feature says so... if that text were omitted, then as bonus feats, they could be taken regardless of prerequisites. (And the text in the Monk's Bonus Feat Class Feature, stating that prerequisites need not be met, is redundant.) ... and the Artificer can take any feat that meets the criteria, whether or not he has the prerequisites.

On the other hand, if it only applies to racial bonus feats (implied by the location but not the wording of the Monster Manual line), then the text under Fighter and Wizard requiring prerequisites be met is redundant. ... and the Artificer must meet prerequisites for his bonus feats.

I'm inclined to assume the latter, and the Artificer must meet requirements... but either way, the precedent shown by the Fighter, Wizard, and Monk is that a bonus feat class feature should specify one way or the other, and the Artificer's class feature is thus poorly written by that precedent.

-Hyp.

 

[Artoomis]

There's no wording under the Artificer's bonus feats excluding them from prerequisites (unlike the Ranger combat styles, say) so I believe they require the usual prerequisites.

I agree, and also think that

(1) The MM info applies to monsters, and not to PCs and
(2) It only says "often" in any case.

Thus, the real controlling rule is that prerequisites must be met. Since there is no rule to the contrary, then that's it - the prerequisites must be met.

To back up my assertion number (1):

"The line gives the creature’s feats. A monster gains feats just as a character does. Sometimes a creature has one or more bonus feats, marked with a superscript B (B). Creatures often do not have the prerequisites for a bonus feat..."

Note how "creature" and "monster" are clearly differentiated from a "character" in this context.

 

[Hypersmurf]

(2) It only says "often" in any case.

"Often" as in "Often, they don't meet prerequisites", not "Often, they're not required to meet prerequisites". They're never required to meet prerequisites for a Bonus Feat; it's just that sometimes, it happens that they meet the prerequisites anyway.

Note how "creature" and "monster" are clearly differentiated from a "character" in this context.

Monster is differentiated from character. "Creature" and "Character" are interchangeable in the rules - the glossary states that "every character is a creature".

-Hyp.

 

[Artoomis]

Maybe so, but do not disregard context. In this context it is clear that they used "monster" and "creature" interchangeably but distinguished those terms from "character."

As for "often," you are correct, and this does indeed establish the exception to the general rule - but only in the context where "creatures" is used to mean "monsters, or, more specifically, creatures with "one or more bonus feats, marked with a superscript B (B)," which only applies to monsters - PCs do not have "one or more bonus feats, marked with a superscript B (B)."

Unfortunately, the term "creature" does not always apply to PCs, glossary not withstanding. One needs to look to context as well to be certain.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Maybe so, but do not disregard context. In this context it is clear that they used "monster" and "creature" interchangeably but distinguished those terms from "character."

But characters are creatures. And monsters can be characters. One of the ways that 3E and 4E differ is that in 3E, PCs and NPCs follow the same rules. A PC with racial hit dice and class levels follows the same rules as a monster with racial hit dice and class levels. A PC is affected by spells in the same way that a monster is affected by spells.

About the only difference between PCs and NPCs in the 3E rules is the expected wealth by level... and even there, a PC with magic item X uses it in the same way as a monster with magic item X, it's just that the PC will likely have more of them, or sooner.

As for "often," you are correct, and this does indeed establish the exception to the general rule - but only in the context where "creatures" is used to mean "monsters, or, more specifically, creatures with "one or more bonus feats, marked with a superscript B (B)," which only applies to monsters - PCs do not have "one or more bonus feats, marked with a superscript B (B)."

Some PCs do. And if you write up an artificer's stat block, is there any reason you wouldn't denote his bonus feats with a superscript B?

-Hyp.

 

[Artoomis]

Well, if you what to be hyper-technical and ignore context, go right ahead.

I remain unconvinced. Not all monster rules apply to characters, though they are generally the same. Some things are for monsters only, such as bonus feats not needing to meet prerequisites. It would be different if the artificer were given a specific feat (like the monsters get), but they get a choice and there is no indication they get to ignore prerequisites.

By the way, as for the glossary:

I'm saying the Glossary is for quick reference, and doesn't always contain the full rules text.

Yes, characters are creatures, but that does not mean that all rules for creatures apply to characters.

 

[Slaved]

So it is unclear whether or not the Artificer must meet the Prerequisites for the Bonus Feats that it gets?

 

[Artoomis]

So it is unclear whether or not the Artificer must meet the Prerequisites for the Bonus Feats that it gets?

No, it's pretty clear they must, given the lack of a rule that they do not need to meet them.